How to get sharpest images from 10D

I've been shooting with a 10D for a couple of years. I'm very

familiar with the camera and it's functions, but I'm looking for some

assistance on obtaining sharper images. I'm somewhat of a

perfectionist and I don't feel my images are as tack sharp as they can

(or should) be. I'd really like tack sharp if possible as I shoot a

lot of motorcycles which have high levels of detail.

 

I'm using the following lenses:

 

Tamron 17-35 SP AF Di LD f/2.8-4

Sigma Pro EX 28-80 2.8

Sigma Pro 80-400 EX DG APO OS f/4.5-5.6

 

I've got the color saturation and sharpness bumped up to maximums in

the settings menus on the 10D.

 

Should I be shooting at higher f-stops to obtain sharper images (f11

or higher?)

 

I've used unsharp mask in Photoshop CS (usually 10% with 5 pixel radius).

 

Any other advice would be appreciated.

Try sharpening twice

 

First - at 250% / radius 0.2 pixels / threshold 2 pixels

Second - at 100% / radius 1 pixel / threshold 1 pixel.......

1) Start with a good tripod and head. Use it.

 

2) Use the sharpest lenses you can afford.

 

3) Try using ADEP mode to give you an idea of the necessary f-stop.

 

4) Shoot Raw, not Jpeg. Use a good converter such as Raw Shooter Pro or Bibble 4.7 Pro, and utilize the detail extraction options. Also sharpening during the raw conversion is better than in camera sharpening and/or after the fact in JPEG form. Also, you might want to touch-up the sharpening after raw conversion via USM, but try using a smaller radius (e.g. .3 pixel radius) and a higher amount (e.g. 400%). Also, learn to use edge masks for your sharpening.

 

5) Don't use an f-stop higher than f/13 unless absolutely necessary. At higher f-stops diffraction will degrade your sharpness.

 

6) try using the sweet spot of the lenses you use (usually f/5.6 or f/8 sometimes as high as f/11, almost never lower or higher.

 

7) Do your own focusing, AF isn't always the best route, and if you need AF (bad eyes or viewfinder) pick a point that is approx 1/3 of the way into your plane of apparent sharpness (1/3 in front 2/3s in back).

 

8) Use a lower ISO equivalent (100) is best.

 

That's about it. If you still have issues, have your camera inspected for focus accuracy, and adjusted if necessary.

 

C Painter

J,

 

I think it's better to let the camera do only a few things.

That's why I shoot raw and do everything possible in the

postprocessing.

 

I wouldn't go beyond f/11. (I woulnd't even go beyond f/8 with the

17-35 and the 28-80.) It's unlikely to help much.

 

Try raw, or switch off in-camera sharpening...and use higher

settings for unsharp mask (I often use 75% with radius 2 then).

 

Rainer

Can you give us a sample image that you believe is not as sharp as it should be?

1) take prime lens (50mm f1.8)<br>

2) use f6 to f11 (f 16 and over you lost sharpest)

2) use tripod <br>

3) Mirroir lock up<br>

4) timer ou remote<br>

5) use one point focus<br>

<p>

a) You don't need a big L'$ lens, One of my sharpest lens is a helios 85mm f1.5 (old russian, screw lens), and the second one is a Sigma lens !<br>

b) Most lens are best arround f8<br>

c) You have a small sensor, and you begin to have disfraction at f16.

d) You need a tripod even if you are over 1/focal-lenght (ie even at 1/80s with a 50mm on a 10d, you will need a tripod to remove all blur made by your movement.

e)Mirror lock to prevent vibration from the mirror, and of course, you don't use mirror lock if you use your finger to press the button for the curtain! So you need to use the timer or a remoce control <br>

f) Don't let the camera choose where to made the focus !

g) I don't like the sharpness algo of my 10d, set it to 0 (no sharpness) and PS with your taste!

<p>

What if you need a foreground object focused as well as the background? Then the aperture needs to be set on 20 or so...

Try a tilt-shift lens at f/8 if you need foreground and background sharp simultaneously - it works much better than stopping down an ordinary lens.

J. Orrand a quick PS action I wrote up for you to try and tweak the sharpening of your pics.

<A HREF="http://homepage.mac.com/summergirl007/eBay/FileSharing147.html"">Link</

A>

You use zoom lens and apparently shun Canon 2.8L zooms. I'd start there, then learn Photoshop. You sound like you have a too basic knowledge of apertures and software skills. Get a couple PS books and some books on photography (for instance, shooting stopped farther down than f/11 is BAD for tack sharp images and 10% USM at 5 pixels radius is silly).

 

In short:

 

Get a tripod.

 

Use lens hoods.

 

Learn about MLU.

 

Perfect your post processing.

 

And start a library.

Thanks for all the responses guys. The tip on using higher Unsharp Mask setting in Photoshop CS seems to do the trick. I tried a .2 pixel with 400% and it's now razor sharp.

 

You guys rock!

 

-J<div></div>

Second shot showing post processing with .2 pixel and 400% unsharp mask.

 

-J<div></div>

That two step process was told me by a friend who does demo work for adobe, and who has

a 10D - I was never sure if it aplied equaly to my Nikon 4000 ED film scans as well.....if

anyone has any opinion/knowledge about whether sharpening should be approached

radically different between film/digital, I would be pleased to hear it. r

</a>

For added chuckles you might try USM 15% Radius 250 px. This is called Local Contrast Enhancement and can do wonders for many shots.

 

Chuck Westfall (Canon USA) on unsharp mask:

 

"The Unsharp Mask settings that we published in the Camera Handling & Maximum Image Quality PDF (Amount: 300%, Pixel Radius: 0.3, Threshold: 0) were clearly stated to be "a very rough guideline for high-quality inkjet-printed output at A4 or letter size." These settings can also be considered as our suggestion of a starting point for customization according to other factors. Such factors would include variations in final output size as well as the distinction between images that are intended to be printed versus those that are intended for viewing on a computer monitor. Additional factors are differences in resolution between various camera models and most importantly, differences in personal taste. Generally speaking, the higher the resolution of the image, the higher you can go in terms of the amount setting in Unsharp Mask before the effects of oversharpening start to appear. Also, different types of subject matter can benefit from different approaches to sharpening. For instance, detailed landscapes usually look better to most people when those images are heavily sharpened, whereas portraiture often looks better when sharpening is reduced, or when it is limited to specific portions of the image such as the eyes."

Work on the suggestions of how to shoot before you work on the suggestions of post-process sharpening. When you capture a truly sharp image to begin with, you'll be amazed at just how little PP sharpening is needed.

 

An alternative to the tripod/mirror lockup is a very fast exposure. I don't usually shoot where I can be tied to a tripod (or even a monopod), so I have to rely on shutter speed - or if I can't use shutter speed, flash speed. That's one of the reasons I love to use strobes, f/8.0 and a flash duration of 1/6400th will squeeze just about as much sharpness out of a lens as you're ever going to get.

"You have a small sensor, and you begin to have disfraction at f16"

 

He means "diffraction." While it's true that diffraction will tend to soften the image as you get past about F11, sometimes you need the smaller aperture to gain the desired depth of field. So you have a trade-off, loss of sharpness due to diffraction vs loss of sharpness due to inadequate depth of field. As a general proposition loss of sharpness due to inadaequate depth of field will be more noticeable, and more bothersome, than diffraction.

1) Own experiences<br>

I own both the 10D and the 1D MkII. There is big big huge difference between the focus capabilities between these two. Then 10D has got very much critisicm for its poor focus, and yes, I've found that too. I use double focusing at every possible time and I never use the servo, which is pure crap in the 10D. It's quite interesting that shooting motorsport (moving target, often servo) I had a focus success ratio of about 50% with the D60. It went down to 15% with 10D and with 1D MkII it's well beyond 85%. I have set the sharpness setting in my 10D to +2, but it seems to hav every little effect compared to the setting in 1D.<p>

2) Softness, AA-filter and USM<br>

It's funny that this is not understood generally even if it has been repeated time after time. Consumer digi compacts and cheap DSLR have modest anti-alias filtering (=low pass filtering) and hard unsharp mask (usm) already in the camera. Pro-bodies have fairly strong low pass filters and very modest usm. Why? Because the "softer the original" the more latitude for both enlargement and size reduction. In the pro-workflow one always makes the size right first and the very last thing before printing is the usm. The key thing is that the AA-filter must produce a controlled sharp edge diffusion which can be recollected back in the usm-stage. It's more work, but there is much more possibilities. A cheap digi compact produces overly sharpened pictures that produce saw-edges when enlarged.<p>

A consumer body is mostly required for 4x6 prints where as the a pro-body is required to to a mag opening. A snapshotter is not ready to spend time in finalizing/post processing a photo where as an earning photog or a serious amateur is. The 10D (a "prosumer"-body) was the first Canon-body to have a strong AA-filter. Good, only that they did not get it optimized as a package. I think there should have been much stronger effect with the sharpness setting - and of course the focus should have been better. It's really a good body for still shooting but for sports or reportage - frankly, no.

A couple more things:<p>

- The actual focus sensors in 10D are thinner and longer that the indicated ones in the finder.<br>

- The center focusing point is cross type and three times as sensitive as the rest. Use it if any doubt.<br>

- f/8 produces (always) the the sharpest focus plane. With smaller apertures diffraction is increased, at larger, optical imperfections come more to play.

Juha,

 

Where the sharpest performance occurs depends strongly on the lens. The 50/1.8 is sharper at f5.6 than at f8. The same holds true for the 300/4 IS, the 24/2.8 etc... In many cases the edges continue to improve even as the centre performance drops.

 

"f8 and be there" is a rule of thumb not a rule of physics. I often shoot at f11 when doing landscape since the drop is sharpness is outweighed by the increase in DOF. I use f16 for macro shots for the same reason.

Alistair, I know that. I was trying to be short. There is also another thumbrule which states that it is two stops from completely open. But anyway, it's about f/8 and with most kino-lenses it is exactly f/8 which is why it is a standard in lense tests besides fully open. There is usually very little difference in the range from f/5.6-f/11. The diffraction really starts to show above f/16. Anyway, you are right.

Thanks again for all the great suggstions.

 

Yes I do use a tripod (bogen manfrotto) and an Acratech ball head mount for landscape work, but I'm rarely in a position to use these items for the shots of bikes, etc. Mirror lockup is also used for landscape, but again not for the bikes as time just does not allow it.

 

Shooting in the f5.6 - 8.0 range is something I will start to experiment with. I do use auto focus on the 10D and have it set to use the center focus point only. I trust the auto focus more so than I do my eyes as my vision isn't what it used to be.

 

I'm self taught, and may just need to invest in a good Photoshop book as that seems to be where I'm weak.

 

-J

This thread exemplefies what this forum can do at it's best. A lot of good advice. Personally it never occurred to me to try unsharp masking at low radius/high "amount" and it makes quite a difference trying to resolve bricks on a building in the middle distance, something my D60 (with a similar chip, I believe, to the 10D) struggles with. A word on the automatic depth-of-field mode: as with the depth-of-field scales of yore, I find that the definition of "sharp" they use in the program is a little bit loose, and I try to stop down one or two more stops farther than the camera wants to go. It's kinda awkward: Run the adep mode, shift the focus to manual, stop down one or two more stops than indicated, adjust the shutter speed to set the exposure. I normally operate the exposure in manual, but aperture priority would also work. Messing around with trying to get the most out of 6 megapixels gives us something to do while we wait for the price of the bigger-chip cameras to come down.